由普司通案分析我國專利制度之法律課題

Abstract

普司通（Princeton BioMeditech Corporation，PBM）專利糾紛案延宕多年，對我國處理專利糾紛案件、產品之專利保護、公平競爭與生物科技產業發展均產生重大之影響。在PBM與我國廠商爭議過程中，運用許多我國現有之法律及行政規定及程序，包含專利法、公平交易法、行政救濟等等，對鑑定機關、鑑定報告、訴訟人、公平交易及舉發、訴願多有爭議。 本研究分析處理專利糾紛之法律程序及廠商可以採取之手段、以利企業面臨專利糾紛之參考，並由普司通案探討依我國現有法律及規範對於專利侵害糾紛之爭議。 鑑定機關不應以行政院與司法院指定之侵害鑑定機構為限，應以公正客觀與訴訟結果無利益關係之第三者為之，將鑑定機關之身份、義務與鑑定報告應規定於專利法施行細則中。對於舉發與異議案之處理，應改為保證金模式，由一般社會大眾彌補審查委員之錯誤或疏失。屬於外國之專利權人欲提出告訴時，可自行提出或由國內之代理人提出，但必須獲得授權，並於提出告訴時證明。同時專利權人行使權利時必需依照公平交易委員會之規定，避免不當競爭之情形。 本研究建議專利權人面臨專利侵害時，應先取得侵害之證據、鑑定報告後，再發出警告函，方提起告訴；就另一方而言，應判斷專利之有效、將專利予以舉發，取得不侵害之鑑定報告。

This study investigates the patent disputes among the Princeton BioMeditech Corporation (PBM) and local manufacturers regarding a pregnancy test equipment patent issued in Taiwan. Judicial and administrative procedures, including the Patent Law, Fair Trade Act and pertaining administrative relief, etc., are examined to explore the costs and issues incurred by the patent systems of Taiwan. The PBM case has caught international attention while it became one of the causes for USA to put Taiwan on the 301 list of observation. The following issues are discussed and the solutions are proposed. 1. The source of qualified organizations or individuals that may submit the report of patent infringement justification should be enlarged in order for the plaintiffs and defendants to proceed a lawsuit. Present practice only allows appointed organizations to conduct infringement analysis is considered inappropriate. 2. Fees for the invalidation of a granted patent should depend on the outcomes instead of a must payment. 3. A local agent may be allowed to represent a foreign company or person to file a lawsuit of patent infringement as long as their agreement is effective. 4. The regulation from Fair Trade Law on the enforcement of a patent right should be more clearly defined and addressed. This study also proposes the strategic actions for both plaintiffs and defendants to mange the patent disputes.